15 Mar 2006
GIBBS V THE NEW PLYMOUTH DISTRICT COUNCIL HC NWP CIV 2004-443-115
- Citation
- openlaw-bbc53b04_0376_44d2_8d1a_8169a18cf7be.pdf
- Court
- High Court
The application for judicial review is dismissed because the Council did not act with actual or apparent bias, its formation of the predictive opinion under s73(3) that the bach sites were not likely to be used for recreation in the relevant term was open on the evidence and legally permissible, the decision complied with the statutory consultation and Schedule 1 safeguards (including termination rights and public access provisions), and the decision was not Wednesbury unreasonable or otherwise unlawful.